Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (346884)	1/23/2003 5:14:34 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Nice dodge. You could have easily PMed one of his friends asking that it stop. No, you followed him there and found something you could use against him. Nobody likes a sneak. Now you're lying about it.

To: epicure who wrote (346884)	1/23/2003 5:22:28 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

You have a point. It is just that it is pretty well established to try to deal with such matters among ourselves before getting the Administration involved. You are right to note the virtual certainty of an unsatisfactory exchange, and I cannot entirely blame you for finding the repeated comment objectionable. But "tattling" is in strong disrepute on this playground, so one does run a risk in not trying to make one's point first. I do think there is a divergence in the way most boys are brought up versus feminine norms. There is much more reluctance among boys to run to a teacher, as it were, instead of settling things among themselves. Bill is reflecting this genuine sentiment, not merely being biased against you, I think. I suppose it would have been wise, at least, to give fair warning that if JLA continued, you would resort to the "gods".......

To: epicure who wrote (346884)	1/28/2003 1:37:35 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

"I don't expect to change his mind, and then he'd just abuse ME." Sorry, but this is quite inconsistant with the position you have taken regarding others. Others have complained of fear of abuse and of ongoing harm being perpetrated by someone they considered an abuser. You have taken the position that no harm can be done in the SI thread environment since no one is real here (your position not mine), and so, claims of abuse that are not carried out in 3D have no merit. Have you changed your view on this? If so, your premise is sound. JLA might address YOU, and if YOU are a sensitive individual YOU might feel offended. I can see how the fear of such a thing could drive one to seek aid from the SI Admin. I note that this is inconsistant with your presentation in the past in which you have provoked and given as good as you've gotten in personal flame wars. Still if you have changed your personal boundaries you could have a legitimate claim. The onus is on you to notify the rest of us that this is the case, and it would still behove you to call jla on the offense and ask that he desist prior to raising your complaint to the level of SI governance. Especially considering the number of personal assaults you have directed at JLA. My conclusion, under the circumstances, is that you simply manipulated the SI Admin to act as your henchman in a personal vendetta. And, that your claims to justify these actions are simply hypocritical.